- NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
- shows RTI
- RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
- 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
- The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
- Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
- Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
I had filed a complaint with Dy. Registrar for gross violations in our society, even the redevelopment was carried out by blatantly ignoring Govt. Directives. In my letter I had exposed various deficiencies in the working of the society, and demanded inquiry under section 83 but no action was taken by Dy. Registrar. The complaint was filed on January 11, 2019. No Response till date.
On 26th Feb, I escalated the matter to District Deputy Registrar, and filed the complaint who on March 7 issued an order directing Dy. Registrar of co-op societies to conduct an inquiry under section 83, but till date nothing has been done. I have copy of the order.
I want to file an RTI in the office of District Deputy Registrar seeking information on the action taken on order issued by them to Dy. Registrar, I want to draft the application in most effective manner and probably in strong legal words.
I want to seek following information:
Status of the order dated ________ reference no _______ issued by them.
The procedure/file noting/officer responsible to oversee the implementation of the order issued by District Dy. Registrar
The procedure in District Dy. Registrar's office after issuing the order to Dy. Registrar to take action.
If no such procedure is laid down to implement the said order, then guidelines/directions for implementation of the same.
whether follow up is required from District Dy. Registrar's office after issuing the order, if YES, what is procedure for follow up? If NO reasons for lack of procedure
Timeframe for Dy Registrar to take action on order
Can you please help me draft the RTI on above points in clear and concise manner so that it won't be rejected on flimsy grounds.
RTI News-11 years of struggle to get the names of all the judges in Gujarat- finally Court makes its own officer supply info under RTIBy momita
Eleven years after a lawyer sought details under the Right to Information Act from the Gujarat high court, the HC directed its public information officer (PIO) to furnish the details to the applicant.
According to the commission's advocate, Shivang Shukla, an advocate, Kamlesh Bhavsar, had in 2007 sought information regarding appointment of judges to the Gujarat judiciary since 1990. The PIO supplied information regarding corruption charges against judicial officers and about their convictions within the time limit.
However, the PIO refused to supply information on Bhavsar's request to furnish the names of all the judges - from the rank of judicial magistrate first class in the lower courts to the justices of the high court - appointed between 1990 and 2007. The PIO told the lawyer that he has asked for the information from the branches concernedand collating the details would take more time. He said he would supply information about the appointments as and when he got the details.
On the PIO's refusal to part with the information at the same time, citing the delay in collating the details, Bhavsar filed an appeal before the state information commission, seeking a reply from the HC PIO about the applicant's grievance. In reply to commission's query, the HC's PIO explained his position and sent the details that had been collated to the commission, for it to supply to the lawyer. The PIO sent the information to the commission and requested it to supply the details to advocate Bhavsar, if it thought it fit.
The commission ordered the HC PIO to supply the information to the lawyer. This did not go down well with the HC authorities and the registry challenged the commission's order on the judicial side in 2011. The HC last week dismissed its own petition.
While directing the PIO to supply the information to the lawyer under RTE laws, Justice A J Desai dismissed the petition filed by the high court itself, in which it had challenged the directions issued to the HC by the Gujarat Information Commission, for furnishing the required information to the lawyer.
View full entry